W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > July 2018

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-fonts-4] Prioritizing font-stretch over font-weight seems wrong

From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 07:19:15 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-402037877-1530602354-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The Working Group just discussed `Prioritizing font-stretch over font-weight seems wrong`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: closed no-change except if the filer wrote a test and UA shows diverging behaviors`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;fantasai> Topic: Prioritizing font-stretch over font-weight seems wrong<br>
&lt;fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2537<br>
&lt;frremy> fantasai: if you have font-family which "normal + wide" and has a bold for "normal" but not "wide"<br>
&lt;frremy> fantasai: if the author specifies "wide bold" what do you get?<br>
&lt;frremy> fantasai: I think you want "bold"<br>
&lt;frremy> fantasai: right now, we specify "wide"<br>
&lt;frremy> fantasai: I think "bold" is more semantic<br>
&lt;frremy> chris_: we have no test for that<br>
&lt;frremy> chris_: and I don't know if we can change implementations<br>
&lt;frremy> myles: every time I try to change how this selection happens, I get tons of bugs<br>
&lt;frremy> myles: so it might be a good idea, but I don't think this is very doable<br>
&lt;frremy> florian: you can synthetize bold but not font-stretch<br>
&lt;frremy> florian: so it's better to pick "wide" and fake "bold"<br>
&lt;frremy> florian: in the reverse case, we can't fake "wide" so the layout ends up very different<br>
&lt;frremy> RESOLVED: closed no-change except if the filer wrote a test and UA shows diverging behaviors<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2537#issuecomment-402037877 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2018 07:19:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 19 September 2019 01:18:59 UTC